Nakaie C M, Rozov T, Manissadjian A
Unidade de Pneumologia Pediátrica, Instituto da Criança Prof. Pedro de Alcântara, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo.
Rev Hosp Clin Fac Med Sao Paulo. 1998 Mar-Apr;53(2):68-74.
Fifty nine asthmatic children and adolescents, clinically stable, aged 6 to 15 years, 37 boys and 22 girls, from Instituto da Criança do Hospital das Clínicas da FMUSP, were studied from September to November, 1994. The patients were classified by the clinical score of the International Consensus for Asthma Diagnosis and Management. They performed baseline spirometry and peak expiratory flow rates (PEFR), before and after bronchodilator, and measured PEFR three times a day (6 pm, at bedtime and on waking), for one day, at home. Five PEF measurements were made serially and the best readings were considered. Variability of PFE was calculated for 24 hours, as assessed by maximal amplitude. The results were summited to statistical analysis of the Laboratorio de Informática Médica da Faculdade de Medicina da USP. The results of PEFR and it's variability were compared to spirometry, (functional score, FEV1-forced expiratory volume in the first second) and to the clinical score of the International Consensus for Asthma Diagnosis and Management. In case of disagreement between the clinical parameters, the more severe one was chosen. The clinical score classified 20.3% of our patients as mild obstruction, 49.2% as moderate and 30.5% as severely compromised. According to FEV1, 58% of patients were classified as normal while the PEFR and its variability classified as normal 76% and 71%. The PEFR and it's variability in 24 hours, correlated with the VEF1, as gold standard, showed good specificity, 91% and 76% respectively and low sensibility, 44% and 32%. It was detected a low level of agreement between FEV1, PEFR and it's variability in 24 hours, in the clinical severity classification of asthma. The results of this study showed that FEV1 and PEFR had a low level of agreement in the clinical severity classification of asthma and when they were correlated to the clinical score of the International Consensus, they both presented low sensitivity.
1994年9月至11月,对来自圣保罗大学医学院临床医院儿童研究所的59名临床症状稳定的哮喘儿童和青少年进行了研究,年龄在6至15岁之间,其中37名男孩,22名女孩。根据哮喘诊断和管理国际共识的临床评分对患者进行分类。他们在使用支气管扩张剂前后进行了基线肺功能测定和呼气峰值流速(PEFR)测定,并在家中一天内每天三次(下午6点、就寝时和醒来时)测量PEFR。连续进行五次PEF测量,并考虑最佳读数。通过最大幅度评估计算24小时内PFE的变异性。结果提交给圣保罗大学医学院医学信息实验室进行统计分析。将PEFR及其变异性的结果与肺功能测定(功能评分,FEV1-第一秒用力呼气量)以及哮喘诊断和管理国际共识的临床评分进行比较。如果临床参数之间存在分歧,则选择更严重的一项。临床评分将20.3%的患者分类为轻度阻塞,49.2%为中度,30.5%为严重受损。根据FEV1,58%的患者被分类为正常,而PEFR及其变异性将76%和71%的患者分类为正常。以FEV1作为金标准,24小时内的PEFR及其变异性与之相关,分别显示出良好的特异性,即91%和76%,但敏感性较低,分别为44%和32%。在哮喘的临床严重程度分类中,发现FEV1、PEFR及其24小时内的变异性之间的一致性水平较低。本研究结果表明,在哮喘的临床严重程度分类中,FEV1和PEFR的一致性水平较低,并且当它们与国际共识的临床评分相关时,两者均表现出低敏感性。